Unable to create DSL properly?
by boy18nj
I'm trying to create DSL and DSLR out of DRL but so far unsuccessfull with
this small example-
DRL (Working OK)-
#created on: Apr 30, 2011
package com.fire
#list any import classes here.
import com.fire.*;
#declare any global variables here
rule "When there is a fire turn on the sprinkler"
when
#conditions
Fire( $room : room )
$sprinkler : Sprinkler( room == $room, on == false )
then
#actions
modify($sprinkler){setOn(true)};
System.out.println( "Turn on the sprinkler for room " + $room.getName() );
end
DSL-
[condition][]There is fire in "{room}"=Fire( "{room}" : room )
[condition][]"{sprinkler}" is in same "{room}" and sprinkler is
"{off}"="{sprinkler}" : Sprinkler( room == "{room}", on == "{off}" )
[consequence][]Turn on the "{sprinkler}"=modify("{sprinkler}"){setOn(true)};
DSLR- (Error message when compiling mismatched input)
#created on: Apr 30, 2011
package com.fire
expander fireAlarm.dsl
#list any import classes here.
import com.fire.*;
rule "When there is a fire turn on the sprinkler"
when
#conditions
There is fire in "{room}"
"{sprinkler}" is in same "{room}" and sprinkler is "{off}"
then
#actions
Turn on the "{sprinkler}"
log;
end
Can somebody point out what I am doing wrong?
--
View this message in context: http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/Unable-to-create-DSL-properly-tp2901873...
Sent from the Drools: User forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
15 years, 1 month
Question on modeling facts
by Brett Bergquist
I am trying to write rules to distill down a minimal train schedule from a
set of overlapping train schedules. A train schedule contains a train
identifier, a schedule that it runs on, and a set of train stops. A rule
that I would like to write is to combine one or more train schedules if more
than one train runs on the same day (ie has the same schedule) and stops at
the same stops. This ignores the train identifier and will discard all
other train schedules that have a different train identifier but have the
same schedule and stops.
I am wondering how to model the equality test for the same set of stops.
Can I have my Train fact contain a collection of stops and then compare the
collections for equality? Will this be efficient? Is there a better way to
model this?
Any and all help will be greatly appreciated.
Brett
--
View this message in context: http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/Question-on-modeling-facts-tp2895595p28...
Sent from the Drools: User forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
15 years, 1 month
Fw: Regarding Drools - Expert and Fusion
by Sumeet Karawal
Hi ,
I had posted this earlier :
" Could somebody please let me know about any link or document for Best
Practices regarding JBoss Rules(Expert) and Fusion.
Also any link or document regarding Technical Architecture of JBoss Rules
(Expert) and JBoss Fusion Stack. "
Also I have a query as how can Drools - Expert and Fusion coexist in an
Application. I have just started learning about Drools Fusion.
What can qualify to go as a event driven system as opposed to rules
based system ?
It would be very helpful if somebody could let me know about the few
things.
Thanks & Regards,
Sumeet Karawal
Mailto: sumeet.karawal(a)tcs.com
From: Sumeet Karawal/MUM/TCS
To: rules-users(a)lists.jboss.org
Date: 05/03/2011 07:09 PM
Subject: Regarding Drools - Expert and Fusion
Hi,
Could somebody please let me know about any link or document for Best
Practices regarding JBoss Rules(Expert) and Fusion.
Also any link or document regarding Technical Architecture of JBoss Rules
(Expert) and JBoss Fusion Stack.
Thanks & Regards,
Sumeet Karawal
Mailto: sumeet.karawal(a)tcs.com
=====-----=====-----=====
Notice: The information contained in this e-mail
message and/or attachments to it may contain
confidential or privileged information. If you are
not the intended recipient, any dissemination, use,
review, distribution, printing or copying of the
information contained in this e-mail message
and/or attachments to it are strictly prohibited. If
you have received this communication in error,
please notify us by reply e-mail or telephone and
immediately and permanently delete the message
and any attachments. Thank you
15 years, 1 month
Drools-Persistence with pessimistic transaction locking?
by Stephan.Koops＠We4IT.com
Hi,
as far as I have seen drools JPA persistence uses optimistic transactions.
Is this required for drools? Or can I switch to locking based
transactions? (Mayby I missed some documentation.)
If someone have a good pointer how to do that, that would be the very
best.
Mit freundlichen Grüssen/Best regards
i. A.
Stephan Koops
Software Engineer
We4IT GmbH
*****************************************************
Veranstaltungen mit We4IT:
10.-12.05.2011 - Lotus Alliance Days in Hamburg, Frankfurt und München
Social Business und aktuelle Roadmaps zu Lotus-Produkten kompakt an einem Tag präsentiert.
http://www.we4it.com/aktuelles/events/365-lotus-alliance-days-10-bis-12-m...
18.5. bis 20.05.2011 - DNUG Frühjahrskonferenz in Bonn
LOTUS ALLIANCE Day im Rahmen der DNUG Frühjahrskonferenz in Bonn.
Erleben Sie spannende Vorträge die über den Tellerrand hinausreichen und erweitern Sie Ihren Horizont.
http://www.we4it.com/aktuelles/events/362-dnug-vom-18-20-mai.html
*****************************************************
We4IT GmbH
Technologiepark 11
33100 Paderborn
Tel: +49 5251 / 70993 - 24
Fax: +49 5251 / 70993 - 01
Mobil:
E-Mail: stephan.koops(a)we4it.com
Internet: http://www.we4it.com
HRB 20740, Amtsgericht Bremen
Geschäftsführer: Stefan Sucker, Vicente Diaz Fernandez
USt.-ID.-Nr. DE 220 859 831
Diese Nachricht ist vertraulich und ausschließlich für die adressierte Person und/oder Organisation bestimmt. Vertrauliche und/oder spezifische Informationen können hierin enthalten sein. Falls Sie ein nicht beabsichtigter Empfänger dieser Nachricht sind, sind das Kopieren, Verteilen und/oder das Aufnehmen aus dem Inhalt resultierender Handlungen untersagt. Haben Sie diese Nachricht fehlerhaft und/oder unvollständig erhalten, benachrichtigen Sie uns bitte umgehend unter unseren oben genannten Kontaktmöglichkeiten.
This message is confidential and intended solely for the person or organization to which it is addressed. It may contain privileged and confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient, you should not copy, distribute or take any action on reliance on it. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail at the above address.
15 years, 1 month
Deactivating ruleflow-group in AgendaFilter to prevent looping in stateless session
by drdaveg
I have a stateless session with a large number of rules most of which set
values used elsewhere in the application so looping is a big issue. The
rules have been organized into a ruleflows in order to foster orchestration.
As a very clean approach to avoid looping (i.e., avoiding adding control to
rules) I added an AgendaFilter that tracks the rules that have been fired.
Several previous posts discuss that using AgendaFilter's prohibit a
ruleflow-group with no activations being detected. Conversely, the API for
(de)activating a ruleflow-group seems gone; what is the best way of changing
the ruleflow-group from the current group to the one that should execute
next (i.e., the next one in the ruleflow)?
--
View this message in context: http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/Deactivating-ruleflow-group-in-AgendaFi...
Sent from the Drools: User forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
15 years, 1 month
Looping through a vector object in a rule
by sdinoo
I am new to drools
I am inserting into a ksession a single claim POJO + vector of previous
claims
Like this
ksession.insert(claim); // single claim
ksession.insert(historyClaims); // vector of claims
ksession.startProcess("com.dur.claim");
ksession.fireAllRules();
I want to compare single claim variable values with all the claims in the
vector
how do I loop through the vector objects and compare the values in the Rule
(.drl) file?
Can someone help me out?
--
View this message in context: http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/Looping-through-a-vector-object-in-a-ru...
Sent from the Drools: User forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
15 years, 1 month
Using constant for salience instead of hardcoded values?
by alebu
Hi all,
Is it possible to use a constant for salience instead of hardcoded
value? It have a sence when you have many rules and only several
salience level. They maybe more descriptive like START, VALIDATION,
etc and easier to maintain in the future. If it not possible right
now, then maybe it worth to request like feature request in the
future?
15 years, 1 month
